GL_Storm wrote: ↑Sun Jul 19, 2026 6:13 pm
3B is pretty thin around the league.
Hear me out before dismissing this - Rafael Devers.
The Giants are going to be sellers at the trade deadline. A month ago, the Devers trade was looking like a bust for SF, but lately Devers is looking like the guy they traded for. He’s a career .274/.347/.504 hitter with a 126 wRC+. He has a massive contract which is why it will be hard to move him, but if the Giants eat a sizable chunk of his contract, both teams will benefit. Remember that Devers is still just 29 years old and he has never had a season with an OPS below .800 (this season he has improved to .791). Only Canzone and Arozarena have higher OPSs on the M’s.
A realistic package centers around a mid-tier, major-league-ready starter under years of team control like Bryce Miller or Bryan Woo, coupled with a secondary, high-upside arm from the lower minors like Logan evans or Teddy McGraw.
In this framework, because Devers' contract remains a multi-hundred-million-dollar albatross, the Giants would still need to absorb roughly 25% to 35% of the remaining $199.5 million salary (about $50 million to $70 million) to make taking on the rest of that lengthy deal fair value for giving up an active, cost-controlled mid-rotation arm.
This construction satisfies the Giants' desire to clear significant luxury tax space while getting a younger, projectable starting pitcher back, and it lets the Mariners bolster their lineup with a premium bat without completely gutting the top shelf of their farm system.
I’m sure lots of you will hate this proposal because it means letting on of our starters go, and because it takes on a guy whose stats took a nose dive tie second he got traded. But consider this:
Devers has been a rock star. He struggled this year, but he’s turning it around. He a Cal Raleigh except that Cal still can’t hit a beach ball with a wiffle bat. Most of us have seen Cal’s potential at the plate and few of us would consider trading him because he’s currently struggling. Devers has a better offensive profile over a longer period of time - in other words, he’s not a flash in the pan and he’s worth the risk.
As many of you have stated, we need an answer at 3B and there is very little out there for trade or free agency. Devers plays there for a few years until he’s a defensive liability and then he DHs.
The M’s actually have the ability to absorb his contract after the Giants eat a third of it and still stay well below luxury tax. It reduces their payroll flexibility, but as others have pointed out, outfield holes could be filled internally and SS and 2B also seem to be taken care of. Anderson or Sloan could be promoted as needed to fill the hole left by trade. In other words, they may not need to make another big splashy expensive move this offseason.
In short, it’s a risk. But it’s a move I think the Giants would be willing to make. And Devers is a player that I believe will be a huge offensive upgrade foreseeable future. Our starting rotation will settle out and maybe even get better as the kids move to the majors. The major downside is that Devers is a below average defensive 3B (ug). But overall, this makes sense to me, full stop.